用工业语义技术评价安全标准文本的质量

IF 4.1 2区 计算机科学 Q1 COMPUTER SCIENCE, HARDWARE & ARCHITECTURE Computer Standards & Interfaces Pub Date : 2023-10-30 DOI:10.1016/j.csi.2023.103803
Jose Luis de la Vara , Hector Bahamonde , Clara Ayora
{"title":"用工业语义技术评价安全标准文本的质量","authors":"Jose Luis de la Vara ,&nbsp;Hector Bahamonde ,&nbsp;Clara Ayora","doi":"10.1016/j.csi.2023.103803","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Most safety-critical systems are subject to rigorous assurance processes to justify that the systems are dependable. These processes are typically conducted in compliance with safety standards, e.g., DO-178C for software in aerospace. This can be a prerequisite so that a system is allowed to operate. However, following these standards can be challenging in practice because of issues in their text such as imprecision, ambiguity, and inconsistency. These issues can hinder compliance, delaying it and making it more expensive, or even preventing it. As a solution, we aim to define means that aid in the identification of the issues and thus facilitate their resolution. We have developed an approach for assessment of the quality of the text of safety standards with RQA - Quality Studio, an industrial tool for requirements quality analysis with semantic technologies. The approach is based on the extraction of analysis units from a standard, on the specification and exploitation of ontologies, and on the reuse of metrics provided by RQA - Quality Studio to evaluate text quality. The approach has been applied on the DO-178C standard, assessing its text as a whole and its different main individual parts. The quality of most of the text of the standard can be regarded as high. The most frequent issues in DO-178C are the use of passive voice, of synonyms, and of imprecise modal verbs. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study that provides a means for a broad and detailed assessment of the quality of the text of safety standards, leading to the identification of specific aspects that could be improved in the text and indicating the extent to which quality issues affect it.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50635,"journal":{"name":"Computer Standards & Interfaces","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessment of the Quality of the Text of Safety Standards with Industrial Semantic Technologies\",\"authors\":\"Jose Luis de la Vara ,&nbsp;Hector Bahamonde ,&nbsp;Clara Ayora\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.csi.2023.103803\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Most safety-critical systems are subject to rigorous assurance processes to justify that the systems are dependable. These processes are typically conducted in compliance with safety standards, e.g., DO-178C for software in aerospace. This can be a prerequisite so that a system is allowed to operate. However, following these standards can be challenging in practice because of issues in their text such as imprecision, ambiguity, and inconsistency. These issues can hinder compliance, delaying it and making it more expensive, or even preventing it. As a solution, we aim to define means that aid in the identification of the issues and thus facilitate their resolution. We have developed an approach for assessment of the quality of the text of safety standards with RQA - Quality Studio, an industrial tool for requirements quality analysis with semantic technologies. The approach is based on the extraction of analysis units from a standard, on the specification and exploitation of ontologies, and on the reuse of metrics provided by RQA - Quality Studio to evaluate text quality. The approach has been applied on the DO-178C standard, assessing its text as a whole and its different main individual parts. The quality of most of the text of the standard can be regarded as high. The most frequent issues in DO-178C are the use of passive voice, of synonyms, and of imprecise modal verbs. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study that provides a means for a broad and detailed assessment of the quality of the text of safety standards, leading to the identification of specific aspects that could be improved in the text and indicating the extent to which quality issues affect it.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50635,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Computer Standards & Interfaces\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Computer Standards & Interfaces\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"94\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0920548923000843\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"计算机科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, HARDWARE & ARCHITECTURE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computer Standards & Interfaces","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0920548923000843","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, HARDWARE & ARCHITECTURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

大多数安全关键系统都要经过严格的保证过程,以证明系统是可靠的。这些过程通常是按照安全标准进行的,例如航空航天软件的DO-178C。这可能是允许系统运行的先决条件。然而,在实践中遵循这些标准可能具有挑战性,因为它们的文本中存在诸如不精确、歧义和不一致等问题。这些问题可能会阻碍合规性,延迟合规性并使其成本更高,甚至阻止合规性。作为一项解决办法,我们的目标是确定有助于查明问题从而促进其解决的手段。我们已经开发了一种评估安全标准文本质量的方法,使用RQA - quality Studio,这是一种使用语义技术进行需求质量分析的工业工具。该方法基于从标准中提取的分析单元,基于本体的规范和利用,以及RQA - Quality Studio提供的用于评估文本质量的度量的重用。该方法已应用于DO-178C标准,评估其文本作为一个整体及其不同的主要单独部分。大多数文本的质量标准都可以算是高的。DO-178C中最常见的问题是使用被动语态、同义词和不精确的情态动词。据我们所知,这是第一次为广泛而详细地评估安全标准文本的质量提供了一种手段,从而确定了文本中可以改进的具体方面,并指出了质量问题对文本的影响程度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Assessment of the Quality of the Text of Safety Standards with Industrial Semantic Technologies

Most safety-critical systems are subject to rigorous assurance processes to justify that the systems are dependable. These processes are typically conducted in compliance with safety standards, e.g., DO-178C for software in aerospace. This can be a prerequisite so that a system is allowed to operate. However, following these standards can be challenging in practice because of issues in their text such as imprecision, ambiguity, and inconsistency. These issues can hinder compliance, delaying it and making it more expensive, or even preventing it. As a solution, we aim to define means that aid in the identification of the issues and thus facilitate their resolution. We have developed an approach for assessment of the quality of the text of safety standards with RQA - Quality Studio, an industrial tool for requirements quality analysis with semantic technologies. The approach is based on the extraction of analysis units from a standard, on the specification and exploitation of ontologies, and on the reuse of metrics provided by RQA - Quality Studio to evaluate text quality. The approach has been applied on the DO-178C standard, assessing its text as a whole and its different main individual parts. The quality of most of the text of the standard can be regarded as high. The most frequent issues in DO-178C are the use of passive voice, of synonyms, and of imprecise modal verbs. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study that provides a means for a broad and detailed assessment of the quality of the text of safety standards, leading to the identification of specific aspects that could be improved in the text and indicating the extent to which quality issues affect it.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Computer Standards & Interfaces
Computer Standards & Interfaces 工程技术-计算机:软件工程
CiteScore
11.90
自引率
16.00%
发文量
67
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: The quality of software, well-defined interfaces (hardware and software), the process of digitalisation, and accepted standards in these fields are essential for building and exploiting complex computing, communication, multimedia and measuring systems. Standards can simplify the design and construction of individual hardware and software components and help to ensure satisfactory interworking. Computer Standards & Interfaces is an international journal dealing specifically with these topics. The journal • Provides information about activities and progress on the definition of computer standards, software quality, interfaces and methods, at national, European and international levels • Publishes critical comments on standards and standards activities • Disseminates user''s experiences and case studies in the application and exploitation of established or emerging standards, interfaces and methods • Offers a forum for discussion on actual projects, standards, interfaces and methods by recognised experts • Stimulates relevant research by providing a specialised refereed medium.
期刊最新文献
MARISMA: A modern and context-aware framework for assessing and managing information cybersecurity risks Performance analysis of multiple-input multiple-output orthogonal frequency division multiplexing system using arithmetic optimization algorithm A novel secure privacy-preserving data sharing model with deep-based key generation on the blockchain network in the cloud Integrating deep learning and data fusion for advanced keystroke dynamics authentication A privacy-preserving traceability system for self-sovereign identity-based inter-organizational business processes
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1